I've figured out global warming (Maybe)

[jodylee]

I'm gona get strait to the point. I recon global warming is due to the weakening of the earths magnetic field. It stands to reason.
Don't take my word forit that the earths mgnetic field is weakening, the link below is a documentry from NOVA saying exactly that, with loads of evidence and NOVA aren't exactly alex jones conspiracy theorist, on the contrary very mainstream
NOVA - Earth's Invisible Shield
In short they say the main effects we would see of a weakening field is warming and a rise in skin cancer. Well both are supposedly happening, you can search google all day and find examples of this.
Im no scientist, don't even have a degree, so if you have any evidence to the contrary then go ahead.

 

[Old Rocks]

From the American Institute of Physics;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

 

[Steerpike]

It stands to reason that solar effects have an impact. You see shrinking and expanding cycles of ice on Mars, for example.

CO2 is an important gas. We don't know the extent to which man-made CO2 is an important gas. There is some evidence that CO2 has trailed warming in past cycles, and then you get a kind of positive feedback.

There's a good chance, based on what is in the scientific literature, that humans have some impact on the climate due to emissions, but no one has yet established causation, and it seems to me it would be one of many factors. Most of the reduced-emissions goals of the anthropogenic warming politicos are laudable in and of themselves, but unfortunately politicians like Gore severely overplayed their hands by mistating the facts, and now the public doesn't trust it any more. Thus the move of public opinion away from anthropogenic climate change as an important issue.

I think anyone looking reasonably at this issue in the late 1990s and early 2000s knew this would happen because those arguing for anthropogenic warming, particularly in politics and in the popular media, purposefully overstated the situation in order to try to drive a critical mass to do something about it. This was a bad idea, in my view, and it'll end up doing more harm than good to efforts to address emissions.

 

[Old Rocks]

Steerpike, read the article. It chronicles the efforts of the scientists in understanding the relationship of GHGs and heating and cooling of the earth. It is not written by politicians, but by scientists.

 

[Steerpike]

I'll take a look at it OldRocks. I've read a lot of the primary literature in this area, in everything from PNAS to second-tier journals like Geophysics Research Letters. My view on it is my best attempt and synthesizing everything I've come across into a consistent overall picture, and then reconciling that with our attempts to say, with limited data, anything conclusive about processes that operate on geologic timescales.

But I'll check out the article. Always happy to see something else.

 

[mdn2000]

Steerpike, read the article. It chronicles the efforts of the scientists in understanding the relationship of GHGs and heating and cooling of the earth. It is not written by politicians, but by scientists.

Old crock the old ball-less liar, where are you in the geothermal thread where you proved you are a liar, you posted an article accusing my source of being wrong, only thing was the source for my post was the same source of your article and had old crock the liar read his article old crock would of realized old crock's article disagreed with old crock's environut position.

So here old crock refers to an article, what a bunch of bullshit, old crock posts and quotes articles without even reading the articles thus old crock understands nothing.

So what are we to do Old Crock, read the article for you and than show you how you are wrong.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/81192-geothermal-energy-for-the-future.html


Old Crock is such a dirt bag old crock says my source is wrong and than old crock inadvertenty, unwittingly, goes off half cocked stating old crocks source is a better source and proves my source is wrong, yet old crock being a dumb ass used the same source, what gives old crock, why hide from your lies, you dont give a shit,

Old Crock is a great example of the liberal/marxist/democrat, they dont know what they are talking about, they dont even read their own articles they think support thier position.

old crock is less than weak, old crock is a moron, only a moron debates a moron

 

[mdn2000]

From the American Institute of Physics;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Old Crock dont know shit and understands even less, all one must do is go to the geothermal thread where Old Crock lied and when I exposed the lie you can see old crock had nothing to say.

Old Crock posts an article here yet in geothermal when old crock posted an article old crock did not even read the article. old crock claimed the article proved my point wrong yet the source for my information was the same source for old crocks article, I read old crocks article, it proved my point yet old crock makes the outragous claim the article and the source showed I made a mistake, what a dumbass.

Old crock goes off half cocked claiming his source proves my source wrong when both sources are the same man.

So why should we look at your article here Old Crock, you dont read the articles and if you do you prove you dont understand the articles.

Old Crock and his environuts, his liberal freinds, his demorats, all say they are right yet they lie to try and make a point, Old Crock thinks all the articles support old crock's ideas yet old crock is just cuttin and pastin as fast as he can.

what a weakling

liberals can only lie, at least as proven by old crock

 

[Zoom-boing]

I hate it when people can't express how they really feel.